Table 2.

Multivariable FG regression models assessing predictors of risk of HGT in different indolent lymphomas subtypes

FL (n = 23 384)SMZL (n = 2005)NMZL (n = 6374)EMZL (n = 12 151)
SHR95% CIP valueSHR95% CIP valueSHR95% CIP valueSHR95% CIP value
Age (y)             
≥60 vs <60 1.15 1.02-1.30 .02 0.86 0.59-1.27 .50 1.10 0.82-1.47 .50 1.95 1.43-2.67 <.001 
Gender             
Male vs female 1.46 1.29-1.66 <.001 1.13 0.78-1.65 .50 0.97 0.73-1.28 .80 1.11 0.84-1.47 .50 
Ann Arbor stage             
III-IV vs I-II 1.60 1.40-1.82 <.001 0.84 0.55-1.29 .40 1.25 0.91-1.70 .20 1.23 0.88-1.71 .20 
Management             
Observation vs treatment 1.23 1.09-1.40 .001 0.74 0.49-1.09 .13 0.71 0.53-0.94 .01 0.64 0.48-0.86 .003 
FL (n = 23 384)SMZL (n = 2005)NMZL (n = 6374)EMZL (n = 12 151)
SHR95% CIP valueSHR95% CIP valueSHR95% CIP valueSHR95% CIP value
Age (y)             
≥60 vs <60 1.15 1.02-1.30 .02 0.86 0.59-1.27 .50 1.10 0.82-1.47 .50 1.95 1.43-2.67 <.001 
Gender             
Male vs female 1.46 1.29-1.66 <.001 1.13 0.78-1.65 .50 0.97 0.73-1.28 .80 1.11 0.84-1.47 .50 
Ann Arbor stage             
III-IV vs I-II 1.60 1.40-1.82 <.001 0.84 0.55-1.29 .40 1.25 0.91-1.70 .20 1.23 0.88-1.71 .20 
Management             
Observation vs treatment 1.23 1.09-1.40 .001 0.74 0.49-1.09 .13 0.71 0.53-0.94 .01 0.64 0.48-0.86 .003 

FL grade 1 to 2.

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal